Area code: 025
Postal code: 2 10036
Tel: 8645 1507
Chuan Zhen: 864 10258
E-mail: Not available.
Website: temporarily unavailable.
Address: No.3 Road, Xiangyang Industrial Park, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province
People's Republic of China (PRC) Jiangsu Higher People's Court
civil judgment
(2002) Su Min Sanzhongzi No.020
Appellant (defendant in the original trial) Changzhou Fahua Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Chemical Fiber Company), whose domicile isNo. 1 15, Changxi Road, Changzhou City, Jiangsu Province.
Legal Representative: Jiang, chairman of the board of directors of Chemical Fiber Company.
Authorized Agent: Cheng Hua, lawyer of Quan Min An Law Firm in Changzhou, Jiangsu.
Appellee (plaintiff in the original trial) Japan Emerald Trading Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Japan Corporation), whose domicile is No.7, Building 2, Shinan Town, Akashi, Hyogo Prefecture, Kobe, Japan.
The legal representative is Chen Junling, the representative of Japan Limited.
Authorized Agent: Wu, lawyer of Jiangsu Nanjing Fade Law Firm.
The appellant Chemical Fiber Company refused to accept the civil judgment of Changzhou Intermediate People's Court of People's Republic of China (PRC) (200 1) because of a debt dispute with Japanese Co., Ltd., and appealed to our hospital on February 24th, 20001. On March 4, 2002, our hospital filed a case for acceptance and formed a collegial panel according to law. On April 4th and 6th, 2002, 1 1 heard the case in public. Cheng Hua, the entrusted agent of the Appellant Chemical Fiber Company, and Wu, the entrusted agent of the Appellee Japan Co., Ltd., attended the proceedings in court. The case has now been closed.
The Intermediate People's Court of Changzhou City, Jiangsu Province found out the following facts through trial:
1.19961kloc-0/On October 23rd, Japan Co., Ltd. signed a loan agreement with the chemical fiber company, stipulating that Japan Co., Ltd. would lend 400,000 US dollars to the chemical fiber company for three years (19961/kloc-0 Later, Japan Corporation lent the money to the chemical fiber company. 1On April 27th, 997, Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company signed a share transfer agreement, stipulating that Hong Kong Fahua Company would transfer its 5 1% equity of Zhenhua Company to Japan Co., Ltd. in full. On April 28th, Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company signed another equity and creditor's rights transfer agreement. In addition to the above contents, the agreement also stipulates that Japan Co., Ltd. will transfer its $400,000 creditor's rights in full to Hong Kong Fahua Company as a condition for equity transfer. All previous agreements signed by both parties are invalid, and there is no dispute over creditor's rights and debts between the two parties. On the same day, Japan Co., Ltd., Hong Kong Fahua Company and Chemical Fiber Company signed a creditor's rights transfer agreement, stipulating that the three parties agreed that Japan Co., Ltd. would transfer the creditor's rights of $400,000 1996 lent to Chemical Fiber Company on June 23 to Hong Kong Fahua Company; The loan term originally agreed between Japan Co., Ltd. and Chemical Fiber Company remains unchanged. 1997 The interest in the second half of the year was paid to US$ 25,000 in June 5438 10, and the loan interest of 1998 and 1999 was paid to Hong Kong Fahua Company by chemical fiber company, and the repayment time remained unchanged. On the same day, Hong Kong Fahua Company issued a power of attorney, the main contents of which were as follows: The company authorized Xin Huang to accept the creditor's rights of 400,000 US dollars from the former Japanese Co., Ltd. and the chemical fiber company in his own name, and all the principal and interest were owned by him personally, which is hereby authorized. At the same time, a letter and telegram were sent to the chemical fiber company. The main contents are as follows: Our company owes Xin Huang US$ 600,000, and now we will transfer the US$ 400,000 transferred by your company to Xin Huang as a creditor's right, and Xin Huang will sign a loan contract with the chemical fiber company. After this contract comes into effect, our creditor's rights and debts with your company will be terminated immediately. On the same day, Xin Huang personally signed a loan contract with the chemical fiber company, stipulating that Xin Huang would lend the chemical fiber company $400,000, with a loan period of 2.5 years (1April 28, 1997 to1June 28, 1999), with a total interest of $25,000 in the first half year and $40,000 in the second year. The agreement was notarized by Nanjing No.2 Notary Office, and a notarial certificate of (97) Ning Er Zheng Nei Zi Jing No.544 was issued. After that, Chemical Fiber Company and Japan Co., Ltd. signed a creditor-debtor termination agreement on the same day, stipulating that the creditor-debtor relationship between Chemical Fiber Company and Japan Co., Ltd. was terminated on April 30 1997 due to the creditor-debtor relationship between Chen Junling of Japan Co., Ltd. and Xin Huang of Hong Kong Fahua Company.
2.1June, 1998, because the share conversion agreement signed by Japanese Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company on April 27th and 28th, 1997 was not approved by the foreign economic relations and trade department of China, nor did it go through the formalities for changing the share right with the original registration authority, the share conversion behavior violated the relevant provisions of the Implementation Regulations of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Sino-foreign Joint Ventures issued by the State Council. On August 8, 2000 18, the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court of Jiangsu Province ruled that the equity transfer between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company on April 27 and 28, 2007 was invalid. On the same day, Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company reached a mediation agreement. The main contents are as follows: Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company paid US$ 400,000 to the chemical fiber company, and the interest from1April 30, 1998 to 10 and1June 30, 1999 was US$ 60,000, totaling US$ 460,000. Each side enjoys $230,000. Subsequently, Japan Co., Ltd. appealed to the court of first instance on July 24th, 20001.
3.2006 1 October 8th, 5438+0,1,Japan Co., Ltd. sent a letter to chemical fiber company, including a letter from Chen Junling, the legal representative of Japan Co., Ltd. to chemical fiber company. The main content is that the case between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company has been settled by the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court through mediation, with $400,000 and $60,000 divided equally. Therefore, Japan Co., Ltd. hereby files a claim. Because Nanjing Emerald Knitwear Co., Ltd., a subsidiary of Japan Co., Ltd., owes debts to China Bank, it decides to transfer the creditor's right of 230,000 US dollars to Mr. Zhou Shengjian of Nanjing Emerald Knitwear Co., Ltd. to settle the claim of 230,000 US dollars. The content of this letter is disputed by both sides. The chemical fiber company thinks that the creditor's rights obtained by Japan Co., Ltd. have been transferred to Nanjing Emerald Knitwear Co., Ltd., so it has no creditor's status in this case, and requests to dismiss the lawsuit of Japan Co., Ltd., but Japan Co., Ltd. thinks that in the letter, our company only indicates that Mr. Zhou Shengjian of Nanjing Emerald Knitwear Co., Ltd. will contact to solve the creditor's rights of $230,000, which is only an entrustment relationship, not a transfer of creditor's rights.
4. During the trial, the court of first instance made an investigation to Xin Huang on1The Creditor's Rights Transfer Agreement signed by Hongkong Fahua Company, Japan Co., Ltd. and Chemical Fiber Company on April 28th, 1997. The creditor's right was transferred to Hongkong Fahua Company, and later to Xin Huang individuals. In the mediation process of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Hong Kong Fahua Company returned half of the principal of creditor's rights and the corresponding interest to the Japanese company. Xin Huang believed that Hong Kong Fahua Company was its sole proprietorship, and it was one thing to transfer the creditor's rights to the company or Xin Huang. At that time, in the mediation, he was afraid that he could not get the money in the chemical fiber company, so he agreed that the two units would each pay half.
According to the above facts, the court of first instance held that in the process of share transfer between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company, Japan Co., Ltd. transferred its $400,000 creditor's right 1996 lent to Chemical Fiber Company to Hong Kong Fahua Company as consideration for obtaining the equity of Hong Kong Fahua Company in Zhenhua Company, and the three parties also signed a creditor's right transfer agreement. Later, because the share transfer between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company was invalid, under the auspices of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company voluntarily reached1April 30, 998 to 6 10, and on June 30, 999, the creditor's rights were 400,000 US dollars, and the interest was 60,000 US dollars, totaling 460,000 US dollars. After the civil mediation agreement between Japan and Hong Kong Fahua Company came into effect, After receiving the letter, the chemical fiber company raised no objection to the amount it should pay to Japan Co., Ltd. According to the content of the letter, Japan Co., Ltd. only entrusted Mr. Zhou Shengjian to contact and solve the problem of handling the $230,000, and did not transfer the creditor's right to Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd., therefore, Regarding the claim of Japan Co., Ltd. to order the chemical fiber company to bear 1999 1 1 the interest of 40,000 US dollars at the end of this case, the chemical fiber company requested to dismiss the claim of Japan Co., Ltd., and the court of first instance did not support it. The chemical fiber company should pay 230,000 US dollars to Japan Co., Ltd. for mediation. In fact, Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company are part of the money originally lent by Japan Co., Ltd. to chemical fiber company, which violates the provisions of the state's foreign exchange control. According to the provisions of Article 108 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), it is decided that chemical fiber company will repay US$ 230,000 to Japan Co., Ltd. within 10 days from the effective date of this judgment. The case acceptance fee is 265,438 yuan+0,265,438 yuan +00 yuan, which shall be borne by Japan Co., Ltd., and 65,438 yuan+0,8068 yuan shall be borne by chemical fiber company.
The appellant chemical fiber company refused to accept the original judgment and appealed that:
1. The first instance found that Xin Huang's creditor's rights against the appellant belonged to Hong Kong Fahua Company, which had no factual basis and violated the law. The power of attorney 1997 issued by Hong Kong Fahua Company on April 28th, the letter sent to the chemical fiber company and the loan contract signed by Xin Huang personally with the chemical fiber company are sufficient to prove that the creditor's rights of Hong Kong Fahua Company against the appellant have been transferred to Xin Huang, and there are notarized documents as evidence. The first trial found that there was no evidence that Xin Huang transferred the creditor's rights to Hong Kong Fahua Company, and it was obviously inappropriate to use Xin Huang's statement that Hong Kong Fahua Company and Xin Huang were the same thing. Hongkong Fahua Company and Xin Huang are different legal subjects, and Xin Huang agrees that one person equals half. It is not clear whether Xin Huang is a natural person or the legal representative of Hongkong Fahua Company is punishing the rights.
2. Some facts identified in the first-instance judgment are wrong. (1) Two conciliation statements (dated August 1 day, 2000 and August 18, 2000) submitted by the original defendant in the first instance of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Jiangsu Province (hereinafter referred to as Nanjing Intermediate People's Court), I don't know which one is the effective legal document. (2) From the Equity Transfer Agreement, it is not clear that the transfer of creditor's rights is the condition of share transfer, and there is no basis for such determination in the first instance. (3) The actual loan relationship between Japan Co., Ltd. and the appellant occurred on 1993, and the loan agreement was signed on 19961October 23rd. Before 1996, the appellant had paid interest to the Japanese company, and the appellant also returned the loan principal 120 USD to Xin Huang. (4) Letter from Japan Co., Ltd. to Chemical Fiber Company on October 8, 20065438+0/KLOC-0, with the content of creditor's rights transfer and non-entrustment relationship. (5) The court of first instance has no right to determine the validity of the conciliation statement of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court.
3. The acceptance of this case in the first instance violated the litigation principle of "one thing not to sue". (1) The application of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court v. Japan Co., Ltd. has been concluded, as evidenced by the effective civil mediation. Japan Co., Ltd. can apply for compulsory execution and add chemical fiber company as the executor. (2) In this case, the application filed by Japan Corporation is the same as that concluded by Nanjing Intermediate People's Court. (3) The court of first instance has no right to hear whether the conciliation statement of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court conforms to facts and laws.
4. The civil judgment of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court (1998) Ning Min Chu Zi No.294 before the civil mediation document of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court came into effect confirmed that 400,000 US dollars was Xin Huang's personal creditor's right and made a punishment, so the civil judgment should be maintained as res judicata. Therefore, it is requested to cancel the judgment of first instance and reject the appellee's claim.
The main defense reasons of the appellee Japan Co., Ltd.:
1. The creditor-debtor relationship between Hong Kong Fahua Company and Chemical Fiber Company is confirmed by Xin Huang's many conversations and mediation records, and also by the effective civil mediation signed by the specially authorized litigation agent of Hong Kong Fahua Company; Jiang, the legal representative of chemical fiber company, did not deny the creditor-debtor relationship between Hong Kong company and chemical fiber company. When Japan Co., Ltd. sent a letter to the chemical fiber company through Nanjing Emerald Knitwear Co., Ltd. requesting to pay $230,000, the chemical fiber company did not raise any objection; The court of first instance seized the case of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court and investigated and collected evidence from Xin Huang. Accordingly, the court of first instance found that there was a creditor-debtor relationship between Hong Kong Fahua Company and Chemical Fiber Company, and Hong Kong Fahua Company agreed to share the creditor's rights with Japan Co., Ltd., which was legal and effective.
2. Even if the creditor's rights of 400,000 yuan claimed by the chemical fiber company belong to Xin Huang, Xin Huang's voluntary repayment of debts as the property of Hongkong Fahua Company does not violate the legal provisions, nor does it harm the legitimate rights and interests of the chemical fiber company and anyone else, and it should be legal and effective. As a debtor, chemical fiber company has no defense.
3. The original trial procedure is legal. (1) The dispute over the transfer of equity and creditor's rights tried by Nanjing Intermediate People's Court is different from this case, with different litigants, different nature of the case and different litigation objects. The court of first instance confirmed the creditor-debtor relationship between Japan Co., Ltd. and Chemical Fiber Company with the civil mediation document of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court and relevant trial records as evidence, and ordered Chemical Fiber Company to perform its debts, which was not a retrial of the previous case. (2) Because the chemical fiber company was not listed as a party in the lawsuit confirmed by Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, and the conciliation statement had no payment deadline, Japan Co., Ltd. did not apply for enforcement. However, after the original agreed creditor's rights expired, Japan Co., Ltd. repeatedly asked the chemical fiber company to pay 230 thousand US dollars. The chemical fiber company does not deny the debt or pay it, and it is the right of the Japanese company to sue the Japanese company.
4. The letter sent by Japan Co., Ltd. to the chemical fiber company through Nanjing Jade Knitting Co., Ltd. does not mean to transfer the creditor's rights, but only the entrustment relationship.
5. The chemical fiber company has paid $6,543,800+2,000 to Xin Huang, which is another legal relationship and does not affect the outcome of this case. If Xin Huang demands that the chemical fiber company still perform according to US$ 400,000 and its interest, the chemical fiber company can defend the mediation document of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court and the judgment result of this case. Therefore, the court of second instance was requested to uphold the original judgment.
During the second trial, both parties did not dispute the following facts identified in the first trial:
1.19961kloc-0/On October 23, Japan Co., Ltd. signed a loan agreement with Chemical Fiber Company, lending 400,000 US dollars, and Japan Co., Ltd. fulfilled its payment obligations as agreed.
2.1On April 28th, 1997, Japan Co., Ltd., Hongkong Fahua Company, Xin Huang Company and Chemical Fiber Company signed the Agreement on Transfer of Creditor's Rights, Letter, Loan Agreement and Termination of Creditor's Rights and Debts respectively, and finally transferred 400,000 US dollars of creditor's rights to Xin Huang.
3.1June, 1998, Japan co., ltd sued hong kong fahua company to Nanjing intermediate people's court on the grounds that the share exchange agreement signed with hong kong fahua company was not approved by relevant departments, and the transfer of creditor's rights paid as consideration was invalid. On August 8, 2000, the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court issued a civil ruling and a civil mediation, confirming that Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company each claimed US$ 230,000 from the chemical fiber company (hereinafter referred to as the equity dispute case).
4.20065438+065438108, Japan Co., Ltd. sent a letter to the chemical fiber company, demanding that the chemical fiber company return $230,000.
We confirm the fact that there is no dispute between the two sides.
The main focus of the dispute between the parties in this case is:
1. Whether Japan Co., Ltd. legally obtained the creditor's right of $230,000 against the chemical fiber company.
2. The relationship between Japan Co., Ltd. and Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. is entrustment or creditor's rights transfer.
3. Both parties provided the court of first instance with two civil mediation documents with the same document number produced by Nanjing Intermediate People's Court on the equity dispute case, one of which came into effect.
4. Whether the original trial procedure is legal.
5. Whether the transfer of creditor's rights is a condition of equity transfer.
During the trial, the chemical fiber company provided the following evidence to our hospital:
2. On April 3, 2002, Cheng Hua, the agent entrusted by Chemical Fiber Company, made an investigation record of Xin Huang, and the mediation document of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court on July 18, 2000, which proved that Xin Huang did not agree to the transfer of creditor's rights.
2. The chemical fiber company has returned some principal and interest vouchers to Xin Huang, which proves that the total debt has decreased.
(1998) The civil judgment of Ningminchuzi No.294 made by the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court on the divorce case between Xin Huang and Cai Guoling, which proves that Xin Huang had disposed of the creditor's rights before reaching a civil conciliation statement on the equity dispute.
Japan Co., Ltd. provided the following evidence to our hospital:
1. Mediation agreement and mediation record of equity dispute case of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court.
2. Power of attorney of Hong Kong Fahua Company to entrust an agent ad litem.
3. The litigation agent entrusted by Hong Kong Fahua Company shall sign the conciliation statement and ruling.
The above evidence proves that Xin Huang has disposed of his creditor's rights, and the civil mediation document of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court has been served according to law and has come into effect.
In view of the focus of the dispute between the two parties, combined with the evidence provided by both parties, after cross-examination and verification by our hospital, we find the following facts:
1. Xin Huang, as the legal representative of Hong Kong Fahua Company, participated in the trial of the equity dispute case of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court and signed the transcripts of hearing, cross-examination, mediation and mediation agreement.
2. After Nanjing Intermediate People's Court made a civil mediation document on August 1 2000, both parties failed to sign for it because Hong Kong Fahua Company did not agree to confirm that the equity transfer was invalid in the mediation document. Later, on August 18, 2000, Nanjing Intermediate People's Court made a new civil ruling and civil mediation for both parties, and Wu, the entrusted agent of Japan Co., Ltd., and Qiu Lianming, the entrusted agent of Hong Kong Company, signed the service receipt respectively. Authorized agents Chen Ping and Qiu Lianming of Hong Kong Fahua Company to "state the case, participate in the debate, mediate and collect legal documents".
3. On May 5, 2000, 1997, 165570, 1998,165438+1October 8, 2000, the chemical fiber company returned Xin Huang's interest of 204,250 yuan.
4. Item 4 of the civil judgment of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court (1998) Ning Min Zi Chu No.294 confirmed that "Xin Huang paid Cai Guoling $150,000 after the creditor's rights of chemical fiber company were realized" before Nanjing Intermediate People's Court (1998) Ning Jing Zi Chu No.0364 came into effect.
The court held that:
1. Whether the $230,000 creditor's right of Japan Co., Ltd. against chemical fiber company is legally obtained.
The creditor's rights of US$ 400,000 involved in this case were transferred from Japan Co., Ltd. to Hong Kong Fahua Company on April 28th, 1997, and then transferred from Hong Kong Fahua Company to Xin Huang on the same day, which was recognized by both parties. On August 18, 2000, confirmed by the mediation of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Xin Huang transferred his creditor's rights to Hong Kong Fahua Company and Japan Corporation. Because: 1. Xin Huang, as the legal representative of Hong Kong Fahua Company, expressed his views in the trial and mediation of the equity dispute case of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, representing both Hong Kong Fahua Company and Xin Huang himself. Xin Huang, as a natural person with full capacity for civil conduct, should know the nature and consequences of his actions, and the meaning of his right of disposition is true, which does not violate the law and should be confirmed as valid. 2. The chemical fiber company has returned part of the principal and interest of Xin Huang. The first two interest payments are from1April 28, 1997 to1April 28, 1998 agreed by both parties, and the last principal payment can only be performed after the mediation of the equity dispute case of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court takes effect. The first two interest payments were the normal debt repayment behavior of chemical fiber company before Xin Huang agreed to transfer its creditor's rights to Japanese Co., Ltd. and Hongkong Fahua Company again, and the mediation document of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court was deducted when determining the total creditor's rights. The latter principal payment was performed by the chemical fiber company after the Japanese company claimed its rights according to the mediation book of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, which was a malicious performance. Chemical fiber companies cannot refuse to fulfill their repayment obligations to Japan Co., Ltd. on this ground. Therefore, the above-mentioned debt repayment behavior of chemical fiber company has nothing to do with Xin Huang's transfer of creditor's rights to Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company in the case of equity transfer dispute, and Japan Co., Ltd.' s claim for $230,000 from chemical fiber company according to the mediation document of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court. You can exercise your right of defense when Hongkong Fahua Company claims the money that has been paid to Xin Huang. 3. The civil judgment issued by Nanjing Intermediate People's Court on the divorce case between Xin Huang and Cai Guoling clearly stated that "Xin Huang paid Cai Guoling 65,438 yuan +0.5 million yuan after the creditor's rights of the chemical fiber company were realized". The judgment only confirmed Xin Huang's obligation to pay, and Cai Guoling did not directly claim the creditor's rights from the chemical fiber company. And the $230,000 creditor's rights obtained by the Japanese company did not exceed the total debt of the chemical fiber company, so Nanjing Intermediate People's Court divorced Nanjing Intermediate People's Court on the equity dispute case. Therefore, the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court held that the civil conciliation statements made by Japanese companies, Hongkong Fahua Company and Xin Huang Company did not increase the debt burden of chemical fiber companies, did not infringe the rights of chemical fiber companies and others, and were in compliance with the law. Both Japan Limited and Hong Kong Fahua Company have legally obtained the creditor's rights of $230,000. The appellant's appeal that "Xin Huang failed to transfer his personal creditor's rights to Hong Kong Fahua Company, and Japan Co., Ltd. failed to obtain the creditor's rights of US$ 230,000" could not be established and should be rejected.
Secondly, whether the relationship between Japan Co., Ltd. and Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. is entrustment relationship or creditor's rights transfer relationship.
200 1 1 8, the contents of the letter from Japan co., ltd. to chemical fiber company clearly stated that "the method of handing over the claim of $230,000 to Mr. Zhou Shengjian of Nanjing Emerald Knitwear Co., Ltd. to solve the claim of $230,000" is a typical entrustment relationship. Japanese companies are still creditors of $230,000. As for the way to claim rights, because Nanjing Intermediate People's Court tried the confirmation lawsuit, there was no payment content, so it was impossible to enter the enforcement procedure, and Chemical Fiber Company was not a party to the mediation book of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court. In the case that the claim for money from the chemical fiber company failed, Japan Co., Ltd. sued the chemical fiber company separately with the creditor's right of $230,000, which was in compliance with the law. The appellant's appeal that "Japan Co., Ltd. transferred the creditor's right of $230,000 to Nanjing Emerald Knitwear Co., Ltd." could not be established and should be rejected.
Three, about the Nanjing Intermediate People's court to produce two civil mediation books with the same number, which one is the effective legal document.
After the Japanese company reached a mediation agreement with Hong Kong Fahua Company, the civil mediation documentNo. August 2000 1 produced by Nanjing Intermediate People's Court was not signed by both parties because Hong Kong Fahua Company disagreed with the mediation content, and the civil mediation document was not legally effective. On August 18, 2000, Nanjing Intermediate People's Court re-made the civil ruling and civil mediation according to the opinions of the parties, and both parties entrusted agents to sign them. As a specially authorized agent of Hong Kong Fahua Company, Qiu Lianming's signature is regarded as that of Hong Kong Fahua Company. The civil ruling and the civil mediation have been effectively served and are effective legal documents. Japan Co., Ltd. obtained the creditor's right of $230,000 against the chemical fiber company according to the conciliation statement.
Four, about the legality of the original trial procedure.
Nanjing Intermediate People's Court tried the dispute over the transfer of equity and creditor's rights between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company, and Changzhou Intermediate People's Court tried the debt dispute between Japan Co., Ltd. and chemical fiber company. The subject of litigation, the facts of the case and the claims are different, so there is no question of a second trial. Changzhou Intermediate People's Court conducted an investigation and cross-examination on the mediation papers and court transcripts provided by the parties as evidence, which was in line with the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law. The appellant's claim that the original trial procedure was illegal could not be established and should be rejected.
Verb (abbreviation of verb) Whether the transfer of creditor's rights is a condition for the transfer of equity.
Although Japan Co., Ltd. and Chemical Fiber Company have not clearly stated in writing that "the transfer of creditor's rights is the condition of equity transfer", according to the principle that both parties write the transfer of creditor's rights and equity transfer in the same agreement and the rights and obligations of both parties to the contract are equal, they should be considered as mutual conditions. On the other hand, whether the transfer of creditor's rights and the transfer of equity are mutually conditional does not affect the right of Xin Huang and Hong Kong Fahua companies to dispose of themselves.
To sum up, according to the $230,000 creditor's right confirmed in the civil mediation document of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Japan Co., Ltd. claimed the right to repay the interest, and the chemical fiber company should fulfill the repayment obligation. The appellant chemical fiber company's appeal reason cannot be established and should be rejected. The judgment of the original trial found that the facts were clear and the applicable law was correct and should be upheld. However, the original trial defined the cause of action as an improper debt transfer dispute and should be corrected. The cause of action should be a debt dispute. According to Item (1) of Paragraph 1 of Article 153 of the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the judgment is as follows:
Reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment.
The acceptance fee of the appeal case is 265,438 yuan+0,265,438 yuan +00 yuan, which shall be borne by the chemical fiber company.
This is the final judgment.
Chief Referee Tang Xiaofu
Judge Zhu Chunyan.
Acting Judge Xu Meifen
April 2002 10
Bookkeeper Chen Fanghua